Here are the guidelines:
- Reading responses must be AT LEAST 200 words.
- Include your full name at the end of your comments. Unnamed comments will be deleted.
- From the "Comment As" drop-down menu, choose Anonymous, then click "Publish."
- Reading responses are due by midnight on the night PRIOR to our discussion of the required reading.
I was thinking this was going to be two separate stories from the same writer, but I was wrong. This is a pretty neat technique on building up on a piece. “The Bath” lacked many details, left me dwindling on what emotions the nameless characters were feeling, and confused myself with who is talking. Yet it is still a good read that left me wanting to know what happens after the call. It could’ve been the cake that wasn’t picked up or the kid didn’t make it. From the “Reading as a Writer,” this story is called a minimalist story. I’ve haven’t heard of this before. I know that having to write a piece like a list or just with plain sentences is okay, as long as you end up going back and chalking the gaps with rich story building goodies and crafted characters. On its own, “The Bath” could just be its own good short fiction. Also, why would you wonder if you should eat the rest of the chips instead wondering if your friend is dead or alive!
ReplyDeleteAnd then you have a rendition of the first story, “A Small, Good Thing.” I found it odd when reading this one. Reading the introduction and looking back at the previous piece, I was telling myself, “Oh crap, did I go back in time or something?” This is a cool reading of an improved and well done piece. I finally get to know who the father and mother are, the doctors and nurses, and a somewhat good ending. I would’ve preferred the cliffhanger, but talking and understanding the baker is alright. I’m starting to get a reiteration of editing and revising here, probably for the hundredth time. It’s awesome seeing the improvements from stories. To many who just see your pieces and not look or pay attention to their revision, these two pieces present a picture frame of changes within our pieces. Probably might give you chills knowing that this isn’t the same piece you had in mind, but a piece best crafted and nurtured to become one of your best stories.
Hector Dimas
Raymond Carver’s “The Bath” and “A Small, Good Thing” are two different renditions of the same story, which follows the unfortunate events that surround a young boy named Scotty and his two parents. While these two stories are the same tale, certain styles and characteristics make them different from each other. “The Bath” provides a more intimate and emotional side to the story. All text in this story is from a perspective, which is shared between the mother, the father, and Scotty. We know their more intimate thoughts, and we see the things the occur around them as it is being perceived by them. “A Small, Good Thing” begins in a similar fashion, but the perspective of it is more omniscient and detailed. For example, we sacrifice the thoughts of these characters in order to clearly see the events that surround them. When Scotty is hit by a car, “The Bath” portrays his responses to his friend and how he emotional feels towards what just occurred. However, in “A Small, Good Thing”, we lose his emotional reaction but gain the knowledge that the individual who hit Scotty stopped briefly, but continued driving away after noticing Scotty standing up. After reading both pieces, we can see the idea and main purpose as to why Carver wrote these two versions. “The Bath” acts as a supplement to those reading “A Small, Good Thing” despite being the same material. The emotional outlook “The Bath” gives us allows the reader to connect to the parents as the deal with what is happening to their son. If “A Small, Good Thing” was read first, it would not degrade the story, but it is missing the emotional attachment. Overall, Carver made these two in the way that “The Bath” acts as a hook for us to wonder and care for these characters, and thus to read “A Small, Good Thing” to discover what happens to this family.
ReplyDeleteDavid Leal
In "The Bath", I struggled reading the narrators part because I was really confused as to who was talking and if it was meant to be said out loud or an inside voice. The narrator would switch by saying things like "He talked to himself like this" (460) and switches between "mother/father" and "husband/wife". I also question the five senses used for details. "His skin was moist and tan" (460). When I read moist I had to pause and think "how can skin be moist"? Unless the Doctor was sweating or got wet some how, but I don't think this was the case in that particular scene of the story. I think another word would have better described how the mother saw the Dr's skin. Something else about "The Bath" was the way it did a complete 180. It all of a sudden turns dark when Scotty (the birthday boy), gets hit walking home. I literally wrote "A WTF moment" on my notes. Besides that intense turn around, I found the ending abrupt in a rude way because I wanted to know what happened to Scotty and more of his mother, father, the Doctor, and the unknown caller. The title was also lame I thought.
ReplyDeleteNow in "A Small Good Thing", I can see how the title works better when in the end, it concludes in a somewhat happy ending of contentment. The details are much more stronger in this second version of the story too. I know that one of the nurses is Scandinavian, the Doctors name, the mother's and father's too, who the unknown caller turned out to be, the two foreign orderlies, and of course; what happened to Scotty after all. The details throughout each scene of the story were vividly analyzed in my head as if I was there all along. I think from knowing a little more about who the characters were from the start and slowly throughout, I was much more engaged in the story and wasn't mad when I got to the ending unlike "The Bath".
-Illiana Luna
Raymond Carver wrote two short stories “The bath” and “A small, good thing” both short stories cover the death of a young boy after his birthday, and how the parents try to cope despite being somewhat harassed by a baker. Though “The bath” was the original of the two, I personally felt like it was lacking far to much for it to be truly complete.
ReplyDeleteInstead of continuing “The bath” Raymond Carver made an interesting choice in rewriting, and revising it into a slightly more detailed story by making “A small, good thing”.
“A small good thing” is a retelling and lengthy version of “The bath” by Raymond Carver. That gives the reader more information regarding character names and an inside look into their underling emotions during each intense moment. For a short story I felt it was able to pull off these big emotional issues,all without overwhelming the reader with useless information. This story covers the same beginning events except with far more detail from the omniscient narrator, and a better close look at scotty’s parents. Not only is the reader given the parents names, but we get a better understanding of their pain as they suffer at the idea of losing their son, and then having to finally come to terms with it near the end.
All in all, I believe “A small, good thing” was a great rendition of its previous version and a great example as to why revision is needed when writing.
-Kathleen Salinas
The first story, “The Bath”, my first impression was that this story seems to have a lot of intentional plot holes. You don’t really get a clear picture of what the story is about but do have some sense of what is going on. The story is about a boy who is hit by a car on his birthday and how his two parents handle the situation. The writing really played with my emotions because the status of the boy at the hospital made it seem like he was fine at first but the ending leaves it unclear whether he survives the accident. The 2nd story, “A Small, Good Thing” was like reading a final draft compared to reading, “The Bath” which felt like a first draft. “A Small, Good thing” gave you everything that “The Bath” was supposed to be. The story had good character development and used objective correlative to move the story. You were much more involved in the story because you knew details that weren’t in the first story. The sequences were more complete and you could really understand the emotions of the characters, this allowed for the story to come together at the end even though it was devastatingly sad.
ReplyDeleteMark Benitez
I found the sparse, matter of fact language of “The Bath” and “A Small Good Thing” effective in its no nonsense minimalistic approach. There were subtle flip flops in descriptions which caught my attenion, however I’m unsure of how much weight they actually carry. For example, when at the hospital, while Scotty is being examined by the doctor, from one sentence to the next it’s “the boy’s wrist” to “an eyelid...the heart...the body.” I assumed this was a foreshadowing to Scotty’s death, the line of expiration where one goes from having a name and a title to becoming a thing. A body.
ReplyDeleteAnd then there were all the empty, repetitive reassurances from the people at the hospital to the parents consoling themselves and each other out of "fear". Just more lingual hints as to the inevitable truth: the reluctance to confirm a coma, to accept the situation. Telling yourself a story to bypass the truth.
Raymond Carver’s “A Small Good Thing” is like watching the ambiguity of “The Bath” through a wider lens, where previoiusly untold details reveal themselves to the reader, answering any questions left unanswered, in scenes, far more colorful to grasp. It restarted, picked up from, and ended what “The Bath” began. Painting a vivid picture of fear, loss and the begining of hope:a small good thing.
Robin Turrubiates
While I found “The Bath” a little annoying to read, the style Carver used was very effective in portraying the shock the parents (more noticeably in the mother) felt as they dealt with the aftermath of Scotty’s accident. I personally felt as if it was very monotonous due to the constant repetition (i.e. “-the mother said.”, “-the doctor said.”, “-the birthday boy said.” etc.) but I understand that this was a decision based on style. The lack of details when it came to the main characters didn’t bother me too much, but I felt that this “detachment,” for lack of a better word, gave the impression that things were going to end morbidly. The cliff-hanger at the end doesn’t do much to prove otherwise, though.
ReplyDelete“A Small, Good Thing” was much more pleasing for me to read, simply due to the fact that it flowed better. I really enjoyed how it was fleshed out more than “The Bath,” and I think these two complementary stories is a good example for how much a difference building up can make. I thought it was a little funny that the “morbid” impression doesn’t really go away until the very end of the story, because it really does seem as if Ann was going to attack the baker there for a second. I also really enjoyed how all of the major characters who had important dialogue were all given names and fleshed out personality and story wise (as can be seen with Franklin’s – who used to be Nelson in “The Bath” – family, and Dr. Francis.)
Ayesha Crutchfield
Raymond Carver's work, “The Bath,” is the better work of the two pieces. While “A Small Good Thing,” offers more intricate details of the same event, I feel like “The Bath” holds more emotion to drags the reader into the author's work. The speed and flow of the work had my eyes jumping trying to figure out what happened to the child, jumping immediately into the emotions of the parents, I could not help but feel helpless just like them. “The Bath” put me directly into the emotions of the characters a lot faster than “A Small Good Thing.” The latter holds more information, more detail to the same situation, giving the reader a more insightful retelling of the same events. The first story seemed more raw, uncut, and a piece of work that came from the writer's soul. Overall the tone, and dialogue tied me into the first story, and kept me wanting more. The last lines of the first story echo heavily in the reader's mind and causes us to remember a time when it was one of our loves ones in a health scare, and we were the ones making explaining to people a situation we thought would never happen. The second story did not have the same heart, but rather was more refined. I would definitely rather read the first story again.
ReplyDeletePedro Trevino
The first story, “The Bath” was short and lacked many details that allowed us the reader to sympathy’s with the characters or to feel the pain we were meant to feel as we read. It lacked feeling and imagery. The scenes were straightforward, almost boring and unfulfilling. At many times I was left with questions as to what was going on throughout the story. Like the scene with the other family in the waiting room at the hospital and the person they mention, Nelson. Who is Nelson and what is he to the family. Or the way the story ends. With a phone call from the baker and the uncertainty of whether or not Scotty survived or died. Then I go on to read, “A Small, Good Thing” and all of my questions from the previous story were answered. This story was much more compelling. It drew me in automatically because I knew this story would be longer and would contain more details of the characters surroundings and most importantly their emotions that would in turn make me feel sympathy. I got to find out who was Nelson and in the end what happened to Scotty. With this story I felt sad for what had happened to Scotty as opposed to the first story where I had no clue what to feel. We got to see a side of the baker that the first story completely lacked. Though I have to say the first story gave me, the reader, a chance to fill in the holes in my mind and come to my own conclusion of the ending and who the characters were. Though I have no idea if that was what the writer intended in the first place.
ReplyDeleteAlejandra Rodriguez
“The Bath” reminded me a lot of Hemingway’s short stories in that it was very descriptive but still managed to be very curt. The dialogue was straightforward in a way that got to the point of what the characters were feeling- the mother’s unending concern, the father’s suppressing of his own worries, the doctor’s surety in his own knowledge of the boy’s fate. What really got me was the last phone call where the audience is left wondering who was on the phone- the baker or the doctor? If it’s the doctor, is it good or bad news? And I think this kind of ending- a cliff hanger- can easily be made to be a sort of cop out, something to do when you’re not sure how to end a story. This very much wasn’t that though, this was very intentional and jarring in a good way because you are made to feel the same way the mother is feeling- afraid to know what the answer to the question is. And that, to me, seems to be a very strong image, very powerful.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading “A Small, Good Thing” however, “The Bath” seems a lot like the cliff notes of a much more emotionally-driven story. The writing in “A Small, Good Thing” reminds me more of the hard-hitting emotions and descriptions of something maybe Stephen King would write. It wrenches the harsh emotion out of the audience not just by revealing the true ending- the death of Scotty- but also by giving a more complete look into what his parents are feeling during the whole process, alongside clearer descriptions of actions and peripheral characters. The phone calls from the baker in this piece draw out an unnerving sense, whereas in “The Bath” they seem more like badly timed calls- or calls that might be from the hospital. Overall, where “The Bath” gives a detached and numb feeling, “A Small, Good Thing” brings out heart-wrenching reality of how it feels, how it hurts to go through the pain of losing a child so suddenly. The ending, to me, is a soft way of showing the smallest beginnings of moving forward with life- finally eating again, thinking about something else by listening to the baker’s words. It’s a hint at their possible recovery, and the wholesome bittersweet tang of it makes the piece feel very complete in a way that’s hard to describe. Devastation turns to just the smallest flicker of hope.
-Lauryn Flores
These short stories were very interesting for the most part. Though they are essentially both the same story, I feel there is a good reason for the two stories to have separate titles. Although one is a shorter version of the other, it seems like it feeds into the moral of the full story, “A small, Good Thing.” In short, this telling was very real. The detail that is given and emotional connection the reader is likely to feel at the end of the story makes this piece work. Some would argue that putting pointless thoughts or details of the character are a waste of words on paper, but in this story, it is necessary to establish a connection with the readers, and show a connection between the characters as well. For example, the way the Ann or Howard feel during the ordeal. Especial what they feel and think during their drive home from the hospital. Often times we as people forget that we probably have much more in common with others all around. Though we may be different, we all share a special connection of some sort. We see it several times throughout the story, how Ann and Howard aren’t the only ones going through a traumatic event. In fact, it seems that there are people going through far worst scenarios. It is a depressing type of theme and realization to think about, but also very true. Later we learn about the Baker and why he is the way he is. We don’t learn to much, but enough to understand that many people endure many things. In a world that does not stop for anyone, we are all victim to something and share that small connection. It may not always be apparent, but it’s there. There’s also the big contributing problem that no one ever talks about it. This is especially emphasized in “The Bath.” Throughout the story it seems as if no one knows what to say, and get the same with the author himself, as if he didn’t know how to end it. It feels very unresolved obviously. In the other story, we see it with a happy kind of ending where we get some sense of closure. This seems intentional. As if the author is trying to state a bigger matter. That is, like I said before, that we all share a type of connection, yet we never talk about it or express it and therefore forget, things end up unresolved until we come to the realization that we are all human beings going through human being things.
ReplyDelete-Mykle Angelo Herrera
"The Bath" at first seemed like a story where very little was really going on. I was reading what seemed to be a tragic story about a boy being hit by a car. Part of me felt like it was going to end very badly, possibly with the boy dying. But throughout the story, it was frequently mentioned that the boy was doing fine and was not really in any danger. I kept on thinking "Is this building up to something?" but the pace or tone hardly changed towards the ending. Then the story ended quite abruptly. At first, I thought part of the story was missing. I was just thinking "What happened after that?" It was just one of those stories where my reaction was nothing more than: "What on Earth did I just read?" It was a story about parents being concerned for their son after he was hit by a car. A bath is mentioned, but it doesn't feel entirely relevant to the main plot. I still remain confused about this particular piece. Mainly since "A Small, Good Thing" feels like the "finished" version of this story. An ending was actually added, bring the story back to the bakery. And just as I was predicting in "The Bath," Scotty ends up dying. This shows that the story was in fact building up to something tragic. But even now, I still wonder what the purpose behind "The Bath" was after reading "A Small, Good Thing." Is it a rough draft that didn't have a planned ending? Was this a story that Raymond Carver that he never finished? Did he come back later, perfect it, and make "A Small, Good Thing." I have so many questions about what I saw here.
ReplyDeleteMichael McCormick
Although both "The Bath" and "A Small, Good Thing" are written by the same author and present the same set of events, the way that the stories are written changes the emotional impact and the overall impression of them. In "The Bath" it is shorter and a bit jumpy, leaving a lot of unanswered questions. The emotional impact was stronger, in my opinion, because the reader was set up to fill in what they believed was happening. Truth be told, I had thought the father had hit the son the first time I read it given how it wasn't really clear. As a reader, it was easier to connect to "The Bath" because it had allowed for some emotional connection. The line "But fear made him want a bath." was an excellent way to play into just how dreadful the entire situation was for Howard. The ending also left a lasting impression as there's no clear answer to what was said. By leaving the reader in a bit of suspense it sets us in that same uneasy feeling of the parents of that situation. Although, it is easy to assume that the child is dead from the phone call, you can't be too certain.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed "The Bath" greatly, but "A Small, Good Thing" was excellent as well. Where "The Bath" lacked detail, "A Small, Good Thing" more than made up for it. It painstakingly explained every bit of the setting and the physical appearances of what was around the parents. Reading "The Bath" first set up the general idea of the events, while "A Small, Good Thing" filled in all of the blanks. By having the details, the reader can easily visualize what is happening in the setting around them and better understand the events of the story without having to be asked to assume too much. What it does make up for in detail and plot driven movement, it loses in emotional punch. This could be because I read it after "The Bath" and was no longer really surprised by the outcome, but I still feel as though too much detail and having the story continue on can be harmful in some ways. In any case, both short stories were excellent reads.
- Georginia Ramos
I found both short stories "The Bath" and "A Small, Good Thing" to be extremely interesting and, in a way, informative. After reading both versions, one after the other, I realized that even though they are (basically) the same story, the way an author writes their creations can make the huge difference.
ReplyDelete"The Bath" was completely lacking in detail and emotion. When I had only read this version, I thought it was fitting. The atmosphere was stoic all throughout and the unknown future casted a huge gloomy presence over the whole story. For me that was perfect, I was convinced that perhaps the author made it like that purposefully and that without it the story wouldn't really be unique.
When I began "A Small, Good Thing", I noticed a vast difference right away. The rewritten story was much more vivid and easy for the reader to picture. As I read it, I realized that the first one had been missing so many concepts that truly brought the second version to life. I hadn't noticed that many details were missing. They made the story more human, more alive. In the first one when Scotty is hit, I felt like he just got up and walked away. As where in the second one we see actual reactions, like his friend crying out and the driver stopping for a moment. We also get somewhat of a resolution. Scotty dies and the baker is sort of a figure of solace for the parents in the end. Compared to the open ended first version, it feels complete.
I guess this goes to show that revision can be a writer's saviour and one shouldn't skip over it in fear of 'messing up' s story.
Diana Gonzalez
At first I really started to like “the bath” but as the story progressed it got a lot harder to read and kept finding myself rea reading and repeating the same line and I got confused with how the character’s names and who they were referring to. It was hard to make a picture of what was going on. My thoughts kept going back and forth. That kept me from being able to enjoy the story, I did like how they started with the introduction of the cake and later bring it back with the dad. With a small good thing, the story was a little easier to follow in comparison to “the bath”. I read someone else’s comment and she brought up the idea of a short story and how it is hard to put a good amount of detail in a story and in “a small god thing” I agree and think that he was successful with what he did with his shorty story. What kind of made me laugh to my self was that as I was reading “a small good thing”, “the bath” made more sence to me and vise versa.
ReplyDeleteAt first I really started to like “the bath” but as the story progressed it got a lot harder to read and kept finding myself rea reading and repeating the same line and I got confused with how the character’s names and who they were referring to. It was hard to make a picture of what was going on. My thoughts kept going back and forth. That kept me from being able to enjoy the story, I did like how they started with the introduction of the cake and later bring it back with the dad. With a small good thing, the story was a little easier to follow in comparison to “the bath”. I read someone else’s comment and she brought up the idea of a short story and how it is hard to put a good amount of detail in a story and in “a small god thing” I agree and think that he was successful with what he did with his shorty story. What kind of made me laugh to my self was that as I was reading “a small good thing”, “the bath” made more sence to me and vise versa.
Deletesorry had to post twice...forgot to add my name at the end.
Jessica Guzman